I don't own a GM vehicle and I am simply stating facts and the facts are GM and Ford both sell more vehicles, including vans, than ANY import brand and thus their buyers opinion is that their vehicles are better than any import. Others are entitled to their own opinion but their opinion is the opinion of a minority whether some like it or not.
mike hunt
You are correct the Doge Caravan is the best selling MINI Van but the Ford Econoline is the number one selling FULL size van, and that, my friend, is what the poster was referring to not minivans.
mike hunt
Jeff
Better, how? Quality? Price? Size of vehicle? Fuel milage? Utility? Better dealer network?
While Ford sells more vehicles in the US than Toyota, Toyota sells more vehicles in the world than Ford.
Perhaps Toyota is better than Ford, and the US people just don't know it yet.
By your analysis, Toyota is better.
However, the how good a car is is only part of the equation. People don't make logical solutions. I know three people who buy cars from dealers they like. If the dealers switched to another make, a lot of their costumers would buy the new make because they like the dealers.
Likewise, I am typing on a Dell laptop because the company I used to work for had an employee discount and I knew I could get more support for a Dell laptop at my company than I could from say an HP or IBM laptop. Are Dells the best? Maybe not. But it is more than good enough for me (except I want to get an Apple with the Intel processor).
There was a great car that was sold in the 70s and 80s: The Peugeot 504 and
505. It was not a good seller. In Northeast PA, there weren't good dealers (Mackin Motors in Taylor and Geo. Alles in Kingston). There was never a year when Peugeot made any money in the US. They withdrew from the market because they couldn't get a good dealer network. (Peugeots were not perfect, however. Mine had its cylinder head off three times - I felt like putting on a zipper.)Chrysler and then the other US makes sold a lot of cars last summer, not because they make great cars, but because they were on sale.
Likewise, Burger King sells a lot of burgers and coffee, not because they make the best product, but becasue they make a decent product for the money. I would argue the burgers at TGIFriday's is better than the burgers at McDonalds, but I sometimes still go to McDonalds.
While sales are one indication of how good a car is, it is not the only indicator. I would argue that the Rolls Royce is a better car than the Honda Accord, but, gee, it seems more people buy the Honda. Sales aren't equal to quality.
No one car company sells more than half the vehicles in the world or the US (in fact there are some many types of vehicles sold and manufacturers, that the US needs three different VIN first numbers). So all the opinions are minority opinions.
Jeff
"N8N" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
No, GM is not building s**te. They build a good-quality, reliable car. On a class-by-class comparison, I think GM has made tremendous strides in the past 5 years with their interiors, ride, and overall presentation... but they're being buried with the media's bad news. In short, they can't "catch a break", and I belive if they could some of their cars (like the Cobalt) could be much appreciated.
That being said, I think in many ways their cars are 1 generation out from 'catchin up' with the best of the imports. But it doesn't mean they're bad cars. JP
snip
ship
Recently, I read that the Cobalt had not done well in a crash test.
You are missing the point, I am not analyzing anything, just stating the obvious. We are discussing the OPINIONS of the BUYERS here. Opinion of buyers that buy vehicles that compete in the same US market among vehicles of the same class and price range. I E Camry and Impala. F150 and Tundra etc. not between a Toyota and a RR or the midget cars sold in third world counties where not all manufactures even compete.
Obviously you might think TGI Friday's has a better that McDonalds, but the fact is more buyers prefer McDonalds, comparable hamburgers, by far. Does that make them better who knows, but in the opinion of buyers there is no question McDonalds are 'better' that is why they buy what they buy and your opinion is that of a minority. The same is true of vehicle buyers and just as obviously GM and Ford have more buyers that prefer their completive vehicles to those of any import, period. More American chose to buy the Camry than any domestic mid size, according to your reasoning they are stupid for buying a car just because they like the dealer. Surely that can not be the case since Toyota dealers are far from the top in any survey of dealerships in the US ;)
mike hunt
The fact is in survey after survey ALL manufactures vehicles fall in to the same category, when it comes to problem vehicles, and that is only around
2%. 2% is the average failure rate for most every product on the market. ALL manufactures today are building good high quality long last vehicles. The only real difference among them is style and price, period. Anything else is simply opinionmike hunt
Actually, we are discussing the buying habits of the buyers, not the opinions. While you would think that they are similar, we actually only know what they buy, not what they think.
The Toyota Tundra is a midsize truck. The F150 is a fullsize truck. Oops. Different class.
If the nearest Toyota dealer is 50 miles away and the Ford and Dodge dealers on the way to work, the person might be more likely to end up with a Dakota than a Toyota, even if the Toyota is a better truck.
So Dodge wins out when Toyota doesn't compete because it doesn't have a dealer close enough.
Yet it is not because of quality. It is other things, like there are more McDonalds than TGIFs, it takes less time to get a Big Mac that a TGIF burger and McDonalds has cool toys, which the kids screem for and adults get to shut up the kids.
Quality is just one part of the equation.
No, we don't know the opinions of buyers, only their buying habits, which are different.
Yeah, but you're not comparing apples to oranges. Part of buying a car involves the dealer. If there is a good Ford dealer down the street and the nearest Toyota dealer is 40 miles away, a lot of people would buy the Ford because the dealer is down the street. One reason why I bought a Ford is when I went to look at VWs, the salesman said to come back when I had the check from the bank. Guess what? I never went back.
One reason why Ford and GM have more sales than the imports is because they have more dealers.
Not in any way. Just like I drove away from the VW dealer. I go to restaurants and grocery stores because I like the service. People will go to where they feel they are being treated fairly. The dealer is going to back them if there is a problem with the car. Many people take their cars to the dealers for service. And if they like the dealer, in 2 or 8 years or whatever, they will go and start shopping at the same dealer.
There are a lot of different things that go into a buying decision. It is really hard to access whether a Chevy Cobalt, Toyota Corolla, Honda Civic, Mazda3, or Ford Focus is the best car for me. I would strongly weigh accessories that are available (like moon roofs, side airbags) as well as the transmission (standard). Other people have other preferences. And the Chevy with the V6 might be more durable than the Chevy with the 4 cylinder. If they like the Ford dealer, they are more likely to buy a Ford Focus. If they like the Chevy dealer, hello Cobalt.
The dealership experience is just part of the package.
It might be that the person is looking for a new car (perhaps there was an incident involving sudden deceleration of an old car involving a tree or the fuel and the rest of the car were buring more rapidly than expected, as the gas tank exploded), one of the dealers is having a sale with special financing that the person can more easily afford, like 6 years with no interest and a nice cash rebate.
Quality is just part of the overall picture. And quality is hard to assess when you buy one of something every few years, and hard to truly compare.
Jeff
You must not be paying attention to the Toyota commercials. They constantly compare the Tundra to the F150. It is also in the same class according to the EPA. The fact that it is a mediocre full suze truck doesn't mean that you can reclassify it so you can avoid unfavorable comparisons. However, I persoanlly prefer the size of a Tundra - too bad it is so over-priced. I can buy an F250 for less. I liked the size of the Tacoma even better (a true mid-sized truck), but it is unbelieveably over-priced (I can actually buy a Tundra for less). I ended up in a Frontier becasue of price, not stlye, not reliability and not comfort. However, the Nissan does have great power and towing ability and adequate cab room. But to be honest, I wish I'd bought a Ranger instead (even less money, a better ride, and it seems to handle loads in the bed better than the Frontier, despite having a lower rating). Oh well, maybe in 10 or 12 years when I need a new truckl Toyotas will be affordable.
Ed
We sure do, around 43,000 people die annually, in accidents involving the
235,000,000 vehicles on the road in the US. However, the fact remains, of the approximately 18,000,000 new vehicles sold in the US annually, less than 8% will be involved in an accident sufficient to deploy the SRS in its lifetime. One of my jobs in the automotive industry was working to designing crumple zones and SRS systems. No question SRS and properly belted occupants have saved lives. Do you know more, improperly belted and unbelted occupants of motor vehicles in the US, have been killed by SRS than the number of member of the military that have been killed in fighting the Iraq war over the same time period? Sad but truemike hunt
.
Even better yet, go look at the IIHS injury loss ratings (see
How can one know for sure with a test as done by the Insurance companies when they are not demonstrable REPEATABLE test? There is not yet a federal stand for side impact bags, bags are still optional. There is only ONE manufacture that builds its vehicles to a standard that exceeds the NHTSA 35 MPH frontal crash standard as well as the rear crash standard of 30 MPH. That manufacture is Ford Motor Company. Ford builds all of it vehicle to a
40 MPH frontal crash standard and a rear crash standard of 35 MPH. The Ford Interceptor is built to a rear crash standard of 50 MPH Ford builds several vehicles, as well, that exceeded the NHTSA side crash standard without the use of side bagsmike hunt
Or is this made up, like the first digit of the VIN?
Jeff
Do your own homework, WBMA ;)
mike hunt
You got is ass backwards. If you make a claim, you are responsible for backing it up.
Jeff
You the one making the claim that there is no difference in the three distinct different digits assign to cars built, or merely assembled in the US. Even the slightest bit of logic on your part should make you suspect that there is a reason for three, rather than just one as is the case with Canada and Mexico. I explained the differ to you, but you choose to believe what you want. That is your prerogative..
mike hunt
Yet your explaination did not jive with anything on the web. Orginally, there was one digit, then two were added. That's because there are so many makers of things like cars, trucks, construction equipment, 4 wheelers, motorcycles and RVs that need VINs, that there were two more assigned to the US. Why do think the digits are 1, 4 and 5 instead of 1, 2 and 3?
And what you say flies right in the face of the fact that the Mazda Tribute and Ford Escape are built on the same assembly line and both containt 90% domestic content. Essentially the same vehicle. Yet they have different first digits in their VINs. Were talking about 90% domestic content, not something like 72% that can easily dip below 70% if a few components from Japan were used in the Mazda but not the Ford. But that won't happen when both have 90% domestic content. In addition, you have said that the Sienna has less than 70% content, based on its first digit, despite the fact that the published reports are that it has about 85% domestic content.
In addition, the VIN designation is not assigned by the Dept. of Commerce, but rather, by the International Standards Organization. The VIN is mandated by US law, but the US law says nothing about any of the digits having anything to do with US content.
The only source that I have ever suggested that the VIN has anything to do with domestic content is you. Yet you have failed to provide any evidence that supports your cliam. You said I need to do my homework. Well I did do my homework. And my homework is not consistant with what you say. So back your claim. I backed my claim that the VIN has nothing to do with domestic content.
Jeff
Oh, come on. The interior in most GM cars is tacky, plasticky crap. The engines sound like they're getting ready to fall apart. I have less than 28K miles on my company Impala and there's more nasty mechanical clattery noises from under the hood than on my old Porsche with 150K miles! The A/C compressor alone makes the most alarming sounds. The whole car just feels like, well, crap. Compare and contrast with the '02 GTI that I sold a while back with 40K on the clock that had high quality materials used throughout and sounded like the day I drove it home from the dealership... if you can say with a straight face that there is no difference in quality, all I can say is, step away from the crack pipe. And let's not even get into ergonomics... why do I have to fold myself up like a pretzel to get my feet out of a full sized 4-door sedan when the driver's seat is adjusted to a comfortable driving position? It's easier to get in and out of my 944, for crying out loud! and the asinine "kick to release" parking brake ensures that I won't have a single pair of dress shoes without a big scuff on the outside of the left shoe, not to mention the beating the kick panel takes when the sole catches underneath the bottom of it. How about that cheap multifunction turn signal switch? gotta love that... and the doors that won't stay open on anything resembling an incline; just try getting out of the car while carrying a cup of coffee and a roll of blueprints... (there's a big coffee stain on the driver's door panel from trying just this maneuver.) I could go on for hours about all the things I LOATHE about this car. I can only hope that the redesigned '06 models are better, otherwise GM DESERVES to die.
Unfortunately for GM, it would seem that a lot of people in power over there think just like you do, that consumers can't tell the difference. I don't think I'm particularly picky, really, I just don't see that there's any excuse for anyone to charge over $20K for such a bloody awful vehicle when a base model Hyundai is nicer to drive and feels to be of better quality overall.
The sad thing is, in the late '60s GM made some really great cars. I would dearly love to have my dad's '67 Cutlass today; that car was a tank. over 300K miles were on it when it went to the big parking lot in the sky, and the only reason it went was because the frame was rotted out from too many Pennsylvania winters. Other than a carb that really needed a full reman (after 300K miles? you don't say,) there wasn't a thing mechanically wrong with the car, and say what you will about vinyl interiors, but it still looked darn good inside. If I had to keep this POS Impala as long as my dad kept that Cutlass, I'd probably start taking the bus. I don't know what the hell happened to GM, but somewhere along the line they started counting beans too much and forgetting that they were in business not only to make money, but to actually design functional transportation for real human beings.
nate
Mike Hunter wrote:
Nate Nagel wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news4.newsguy.com:
You are right. The bean counters (dudes with spreadsheets on their laptops) have taken over and have managed to extract much of the quality out of the cars. They're short sighted. They're focused on saving a buck or 2 NOW instead of building quality cars that people will want to buy now and in the future. Long sighted planning means building quality products to ensure a future customer base and repeat customers and new customers. And having better products means they can charge more for them and actually get more for them. If the Japanese and Germans can build quality cars and make money and sell them for retail, then the Americans can. If auto makers use crappy materials/engineering, then they are forced to sell for less money and with heavy rebates, so they then have less money for better materials/engineering, then they HAVE to use cheaper materials/engineering. Viscious cycle. Downward spiral. But I do think the domestics have improved somewhat.
(...)
Are you going to tell me that there are not bean counters in Europe and Asia?
There are.
The Asian and European automakers are not stuck paying pensions and health care for retirees like they are in the US. Nor do they have contracts that make it so that someoe who is laid off gets as much as someone who still works for the company.
Bean counters are important. Without bean counters, you wouldn't even know how much to sell a car for or how much those retirees need to get paid.
Jeff
>MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.